The truth on 20th century’s socialism

All people in the world are assured that the socialism fell apart and that the capitalism has returned. Meanwhile, till now in the history it was happening after the destruction of one determined social-economic system to come up another more developed, humaner and more progressive system. What kind of regression is it now and is it possible? What happens?

There is no any regression and it isn’t possible. It begins demolishing only the illusion which author is Lenin and the social ,,learned men” of the twentieth century couldn’t explain it and today they give quite wrong explanations about the same illusion.

Under the idea – social learned men – we shall include: the politicians and the doctors of economic, political, law, social, military sciences and the logic. It has to ascertain an opinion that they didn’t research the works of Marx and Engels and by reason of that, they couldn’t catch sight of and critic properly what Lenin did indeed and what it was completely incorrectly. It is quite obviously that they weren’t by any cause learned men when they couldn’t understand from the works of Marx and Engels even one conclusion, although they write in own works so clearly that it isn’t possible one not to understand them or become confused. It means, that all of social ,,learned men” of XX century are betrayers of the scientific truth and genocidal evildoers with highest rang because not only that they didn’t prevent any social conflict with human deaths but they conspire a concept of society which is found on private property over the means of production that leads to ,,war of all against all” (bellum amnium contra amnes).

It’s unyielding fact that Lenin is a creator of the Great October Revolution by which the working class conquested arm victory over the bourgeoisie not only in Russia than over all world too. It was a concrete proof that it was possible to obtain the bourgeoisie by fighting. Meanwhile, Lenin instead to extend the revolution on economic plan with the production – he abide by being a bond to the bourgeois pragmatism and he restored the trade economy. Four unfull years later, after successful arm victory, he ruined the Great October Revolution entirely by his ,,new economic policy” (NEP). As in the Great French Bourgeois Revolution: ,,Liberté, égalité et fraternité”, the socialism, found on capitalist production, was turned around unfreedom, inequality and struggle against each other.

Lenin wasn’t conscious about it and he consoled himself, and calmed the others down by his words: ,,It’s not dangerously, because the power will stay in the hands of the workers and the peasants, and by reason of that it will not restore the property of the capitalists and the land-owners”. It was catastrophic. It seemed that Lenin didn’t know that ,,the power in the hands of the workers and the peasants” couldn’t anything against the trade production. His misapprehension became an illusion of XX century and when it started ruining, the social learned men (it would be better and righter to say: the pseudo-learned men and the genocidal evildoers) began accusing Marx but without mentioning any mistake of him. And Marx wasn’t mistaken anything that we will see it from then on.

Against the end of the twentieth century, the antagonisms – immanent of the trade economy – sharpened to the states of being red-hot. First of all, the strikes and the demonstrations have begun in Macedonia (1988), afterward they carried over Montenegro and Bosna and Herzegovina and then they spread all Yugoslavia. And the ,,socialism” fell down over all European countries. And because that kind of ,,socialism” or pseudo-socialism doesn’t differ from those systems in China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Libya, Venezuela…, it is just a question of time when and there the capitalism shall discover its monstrous face.

It poses a question: How was it possible the social intellectuals with scientific titles not to perceive all of that? Even one such as Sartre, Rasel or Lukač. And during the Lenin’s time and all twentieth century there were works of Marx and Engels – and besides whole anticommunist hysteria of the bourgeoisie class – by which it can be concluded that the socialism and the money-trade working are incoherent. In the ,,Poverty of the philosophy” by which Marx reviews to Proudhon, he says: ,,Who with the categories of the political economy builds the edifice of some ideological system, he disunites the members of the social system. Then he overloads every member of the society in a separate society and afterward these separate societies come forward one by one”. This conclusion says enough that it is not possible building of the socialism with money, banks, market, bidding, demand, credit and etc. It’s a lot strange that pseudo-learned men didn’t see it. Thinking that Marx became obsolete, they renamed all the categories of the political economy with ,,socialist” and they were assured that it was a scientific contribution to the socialism. So, there was a ,,political economy of the socialism”, a ,,theory and analysis on the balance”, a ,,science of the finances”, even there were lows which were transcribed from Bismark lows. Of course, when it’s restored the capitalistic material base the superstructure has to be capitalistic too. Pseudo-learned men treated with the categories of the political economy like the cannibal’s relation to the human meat when they renamed it with ,,chicken” and can eat it with good conscience.

There are attitudes in all works of Marx and Engels in which it asserts pronouncedly that the working class to alter her state – to liberate herself as a class, to emancipate herself – she has to extend the revolution into the production. It cannot be achieved by arresting and shooting at the owners over the means of production but with setting of the same into production by reason of production’s enlargement to need’s extent plus determined reserve. It’s a socialization over the means of production as opposed to the formal and bombastic declaration of socialization and essential withholding in private property of unproductive toil by withholding of the merchandise economy.

From essential socialization of the means of production it results: 1. Abolition of the market and the trade; 2. Abolition of the currency; 3. Abolition of the difference among the unproductive and the productive toil and 4. Abolition of the old social toil’s division: the state with all its attributes – the army, the police, the judicature and the administration etc. All these measures result from one by another and they are indispensable condition without its realization the socialism is not possible. The practice proved and proves it and by reason of that we shouldn’t retreat from the marxism which is included only in the works of Marx and Engels.

In the pseudo-socialism by reason of the old capitalistic material base there was the old social toil’s division too but then it was and how overdid. In the name of some ,,proletarian” solidarity, the producer had ,,to exchange” his toil with ,,the workers” of security, administration, culture, including the priests and the prostitutes (they were ,,workers” according to Kardelj’s doctrine ,,Directions of the socialistic self-management development”). Instead to abolish the army, the police, the judicature, the pressmen, the writers, the actors, the sculptors… as professions, they renamed with workers and went into the factories learning the workers painting, playing on some musical instrument, acting, drama, writing, including a participation in practices of defense and protection.

The worker had to give his product over buying and selling to the mentioned ,,workers” but for return he obtained nothing. What can get the worker by that person who doesn’t produce anything for own existence and who exist by the produced of the workers? Nothing.

On many places Marx says that the worker is just a commodity over the trade economy which with its price enters into the value of the product – the stock that he produces. It’s a ,,natural” low, a physical low. And from that low the worker cannot rescue himself if you just tell him that the factory belongs to him and that the production is socialistic. He stays being a commodity at the political-economic sense and any kind of Lenin, Tito or Mao cannot save him from it.

Even the enlargement of the wages is not a decision. ,,The enlargement of the working force’s price would be only a better payment for the slave but it doesn’t modify ahead his human emancipation” – says Marx. It’s wrote clear, unequivocally and it isn’t possible to understand it wrongly. But also the greatest economist of Tito – Kiro Gligorov – (even in 1983) was delivering lectures over all Yugoslavia in which he stated: ,,Socialistic trade production differs from the capitalistic…” It means that Gligorov as a highly state and party functionary in Yugoslavia during the reign of Tito didn’t know anything about the Marxism. It’s clear totally that this kind of functionaries contributed most of all others the socialism to stay unknown for the workers.

We have to ask ourselves: have read all of these men something from the works of Marx and Engels and were they thinking really about the social problems? The answer is negative because it is evident that neither they didn’t think nor they wanted to read. They just derived profit from the benefits and the privileges of their scientific titles and high states but the scientific truth neither was an interest for them nor they wanted to learn it. They kept the scientific truth in silent intentionally because they were professionally obliged to know it and announce it to the public. As soon as they had kept it in silent intentionally or they didn’t want to learn it then they did and they’re doing still crime against the humanity. Shaling says: ,,Who hides principles which can be announced to all people, he treats maleficent versus the mankind”. The victims of these genocidal evildoers are all died in different social conflicts, propertied disputes, died by some kind of illness which can be treated, died by reason of bad living standard, victims of different psychic sicknesses and by all that which results from the bad social state. The genocide of all of these evildoers is bigger than Hitler’s crime because their ,,teaching” contributes to situation of ,,war of all against all”.